By Jueseppi B.
Now comes a bill by TeaTardedRepubliCANT Sen. Roy Blunt, of the great State of Missouri, even more stupid than the man himself. I wonder when or if the GOPretenders will ever get to that Jobs Bill that POTUS Obama sent to the Houses of Congress, back so many months ago? I understand the RepubliCANTS are busy right now trying to keep their hands up the uterus of Americans Women, but don’t you think it’s time our elected politicians on the Reich side of the aisle get back to why they were elected?
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) and his new amendment to the Affordable Care Act which would allow any employer or insurance company to “exclude any health service, no matter how essential, from coverage if they morally object to it.”
A simple overview of the Blunt Drama/Trauma bill:
Under the measure, an insurer or an employer would be able to claim a moral or religious objection to covering HIV/AIDS screenings, Type 2 Diabetes treatments, cancer tests or anything else they deem inappropriate or the result of an “unhealthy” or “immoral” lifestyle. Similarly, a health plan could refuse to cover mental health care on the grounds that the plan believes that psychiatric problems should be treated with prayer.
Individuals can also opt out of any of that coverage they find morally objectionable. The National Women’s Law Center explains how dangerously limited this could be to everyone’s health insurance: “Blunt’s language is vague enough that ‘insurers may be able to sell plans that do not cover services required by the new health care law to an entire market because one individual objects, so all consumers in a market lose their right to coverage of the full range of critical health services.’”
Apparently Blunt figures he can’t be called out for specifically for trying to limit women’s health care options if he attacks everybody. So if you’re one of those people who lost at genetic Russian Roulette and end up susceptible to Type 2 diabetes, or if you’re on of the 10 to 15 percent of lung cancer victims who isn’t a smoker, or are among the 50 percent of victims who is a former smoker, you’re shit out of luck. Sexually active? You won’t even be able to be screened for HIV/AIDS (really smart disease control, there).
Is this insane and extreme? Of course. Would it be a public health disaster? Absolutely. Do TeaTardedRepubliCANTS care? Absolutely not.
Senate Democrats have raised concerns that the “religious freedom” argument is actually part of a broader attempt by social conservatives to restrict access to birth control.
“Mr. President, if this amendment passes, it would ban contraception coverage for any woman in America whose boss has a personal objection to it,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the Senate Floor Wednesday. “This measure would force women to surrender control of their own health decisions to their bosses. That concept, it is not merely quaint or old-fashioned. It is dangerous and it is wrong.”
A 2001 court case against Walmart provides a practical example of the potential consequences millions of people would face if the government allows employers to pick and choose which preventative health services they cover. Lisa Smith Mauldin, a 22-year-old customer services manager and divorced mother of two earning $12 per hour, sued Wal-Mart for sexual discrimination because it excluded contraceptives from its prescription drug plan. She said the $30 per month cost of birth control pills was a significant financial burden for her.
In September 2002, the case turned into a class action suit on behalf of all female employees at Walmart, who demanded that the company’s health plan cover prescription contraceptives. The case was dismissed in December 2006, when Walmart decided to begin covering their employees’ birth control.
Walmart is not the only major company that has run into legal troubles for excluding contraception coverage from its health plan. Dow Jones & Co., Bartell Drug Co., United Parcel Services (UPS) and Daimler Chrysler have all been sued in similar cases.
These major companies are now required under Title XII to cover contraception for their employees to the same extent that they cover the costs of other types of drugs. But if the Blunt amendment passes, they will be able to ignore the cost-sharing requirement of the Affordable Care Act that asks them to cover birth control at no cost for their employees, leaving women with a burdensome co-pay. They will also be able to freely deny their employees other kinds of health coverage by citing a moral objection.
WE CAN NOT ALLOW THIS BILL TO BECOME A LAW.
18.6% of Americans struggle DAILY to afford food. Yet, instead of passing legislation on the floor of both Houses of Congress, THAT WILL PROVIDE JOBS, AND LOWER UNEMPLOYMENT, our stupid elected officials are arguing over women’s contraceptive coverage within private insurance companies. The average Wall Street bonus last year was $186,000.00. Thats A BONUS OF ONE HUNDRED & EIGHTY SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS……A BONUS, NOT A SALARY!!
Solution….Fight back, and here’s how. Join the United Against The War On Women Movement.
Join this movement, join the national organization and from there join the local movement for your state. This is the only way to show these TeaTardedRepubliCANTS who “We The People” are.
- Congress: the Republican led House – the Senate considers S.1813,Surface Transportation bill &Sen.RoyBlunt’s war on Women- Amendment#1520 continues on 3/1/2012 (ynative77.wordpress.com)
- Olympia Snowe Opposes GOP’s Anti-Contraception Blunt Amendment (thinkprogress.org)
- Don’t threaten women’s health care (cnn.com)
- Lady Republican senators not on board with Blunt Amendment to block birth control coverage (dailykos.com)